Re: Two versions in the archives
Peter Makholm <peter@makholm.net> wrote:
>Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de> writes:
>> We have already examples of two different versions of a program packaged,
>> e.g. xemacs20 and xemacs21 or fvwm1 and fvwm.
>
>Yes and I have allway hated that. It took me a long time to find out
>why my emacs didn't get upgraded as i should do. At least make it hard
>to use old versions not hard to follow the upstream version. (well
>thats what fvwm did assuming the above packages is correct but havn't
>we had fvwm2 packages with a "2" in its names?
While it was unstable, yes; trn and trn4 are in much the same situation
right now. (If trn4 ever gets released out of testing upstream, I'd like
to rename these to trn3 and trn.)
--
Colin Watson [cjw44@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: